inal oop eteE sss 
XXIV. On the Question “Whether Music is necessary to the 
Orator,—to what Extent, and how most readily attainal le? #7? 
By Henry Urineton, Esq. 
(Centinued from vol. li, p. 461.] 
To Mr. Tilloch. 
Blair’s Hill, Cork, July 28, 1813. 
Sir, — Your late Magazine for June having ‘contained my 
communication of the 10th of that month, without any further 
introduction I shall proceed with my subject. 
Examination of Tae SPEAKER continued. 
OF CERTAIN MODULATIONS, &c. 
Observation 4.—Aided by my associate (to whose excellent ear 
I acknowledge myself indebted, and without whose concurrence 
I have never once ventured to decide, throughout this interesting 
inquiry), I now investigated, as minutely as possible, the most 
prominent species of sentences and rhetorical figures which pre- 
sented themselves in animated conversation ;—but in vain, They 
varied, it is true; yet the characteristic difference of any one 
species of either was absolutely undefinable ; the alteration of a 
single word, or the slightest change of collocation, producing, in 
the very same Benteniee: a difference in the areuilvaons Even 
the INTERROGATORY itself was equally uncertain—the pitch ex- 
cepted, which towards the, conclusion was generally, not always, 
higher than ¢haé pitch which an answer to such interrogatory 
would have produced. The EXCLAMATION, especially when. 
consisting of several words, was equally if net more variable in 
its character than the Interrogatory ; but, when constituted by 
one or two syllables, and indicating surprise, it uniformly ascended 
the scale. . The PARENTHESIs appeared more regular, in one re- 
spect, than either the Interrogatory or the Exclamation, ifs pitch 
being almost always lower than that of the preceding or succeed- 
ing passage. Lastly, with regard to the pERIob—even chis (I 
speak of the tolerably well executed period) apparently possessed 
but one undeviating distinction; namely, that its ultimate syl- 
lable was at all times lower than the preceding one; the /izal 
cadence (as I shall call it), or falling of the voice at the con- 
clusion, hardly ever extending itself so far backward as the ante- 
penult. , 
‘ Remarks.—Our coincidence with ancient usage is equally eon- 
spicuous in the case of imlerrogatory as in that of the diapente 
which was pemeieity discussed in my paper of the 10th of Jun 
Vl. 52. No. 245, Sept. 1818, L Quintilian 
